Back
DINESH MEHTA
Shivnarayan – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
1. By way of present petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 14.03.2019 passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate, Negotiable Instruments Act Cases No. 1, Bhilwara (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial Court'), whereby the right of the accused to cross-examine the complainant has been closed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the trial Court has erred in closing petitioner's right of cross-examining the complainant inasmuch as the trial Court has proceeded with haste.
3. Learned counsel submitted that the trial Court ought to have adopted justice oriented approach.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record including the impugned order dated 14.03.2019 passed by the trial Court.
5. On perusal of the order impugned, it is apparent that the present petitioner (accused) against whom cognizance had been taken on 16.01.2012 absconded and a permanent arrest warrant was issued against him.
6. Where after, he was arrested and granted bail. It is to be noted that on 28.03.2016, the complainant had given his evidence in chief and the matter is pending for cross-examination sin
The accused's repeated absences and conduct justified the trial Court's decision to close the right to cross-examine the complainant.
The right to cross-examine can be forfeited through negligence, and courts may reject applications to recall such rights if the accused fails to act timely.
The court upheld the trial court's decision to close the petitioner's right to cross-examine due to repeated adjournments, emphasizing the need for expeditious proceedings under the Negotiable Instru....
The court upheld the dismissal of a petition for failing to cross-examine the complainant, emphasizing the importance of compliance with court orders and procedural timelines.
The right to cross-examine is crucial for a fair trial; past absences of the petitioner warrant reconsideration, allowing a final opportunity for cross-examination.
The right to cross-examine the complainant in dishonor of cheque cases is essential for fair trials, as its denial violates natural justice.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
